About: Intel Corp. v. Hamidi

Facets (new session)
Description
Metadata
Settings
- Rule:
- Inverse Functional Properties:
- "Same As":

About: Intel Corp. v. Hamidi Goto Sponge NotDistinct Permalink

An Entity of Type : owl:Thing, within Data Space : dbpedia.demo.openlinksw.com associated with source document(s)
QRcode icon

http://dbpedia.demo.openlinksw.com/describe/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdbpedia.org%2Fresource%2FIntel_Corp._v._Hamidi&invfp=IFP_OFF&sas=SAME_AS_OFF

Intel Corp. v. Hamidi, 30 Cal. 4th 1342 (2003), is a decision of the California Supreme Court, authored by Associate Justice Kathryn Werdegar. In Hamidi the California Supreme Court held that a former Intel Corporation employee's e-mails to current Intel employees, despite requests by Intel to stop sending messages, did not constitute trespass of Intel's e-mail system. The decision was notable because the court declined to extend common law trespass claims to the computer context, absent actual damage.

Attributes	Values
rdfs:label	Intel Corp. v. Hamidi (en)
rdfs:comment	Intel Corp. v. Hamidi, 30 Cal. 4th 1342 (2003), is a decision of the California Supreme Court, authored by Associate Justice Kathryn Werdegar. In Hamidi the California Supreme Court held that a former Intel Corporation employee's e-mails to current Intel employees, despite requests by Intel to stop sending messages, did not constitute trespass of Intel's e-mail system. The decision was notable because the court declined to extend common law trespass claims to the computer context, absent actual damage. (en)
dcterms:subject	2003 in case law 2003 in the United States United States Internet case law Supreme Court of California tort case law United States tort case law Intel litigation
Wikipage page ID	18307774 (xsd:integer)
Wikipage revision ID	1111664435 (xsd:integer)
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage	California Supreme Court Carlos R. Moreno Ronald M. George 2003 in case law Joyce L. Kennard 2003 in the United States United States Internet case law Supreme Court of California tort case law Trespass to chattels Stanley Mosk E-mail United States tort case law Nuisance Cause of action Janice Rogers Brown Intel litigation Kathryn Werdegar Trespass Intel Corporation Associate Justice Trespass to chattel dbr:Steven_Z._Perren
Link from a Wikipage to an external page	http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/mainCaseScreen.cfm%3Fdist=0&doc_id=1835460&doc_no=S103781/ http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/mainCaseScreen.cfm%3Fdist=3&doc_id=710358&doc_no=C033076/
sameAs	Intel Corp. v. Hamidi Intel Corp. v. Hamidi Intel Corp. v. Hamidi
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate	dbt:Italic_title dbt:Reflist dbt:Short_description dbt:Law_report dbt:Infobox_California_Supreme_Court_case dbt:Intel dbt:United_States_tort_case_law
Dissent	Stanley Mosk Janice Rogers Brown
JoinDissent	Ronald M. George
JoinMajority	Carlos R. Moreno Joyce L. Kennard dbr:Steven_Z._Perren
Prior	Superior Court of the Sacramento County, Intel Corp. v. Hamidi, 94 Cal. App. 4th 325 (en)
citations	25920.0 (second)
fullname	Intel Corporation V. Kourosh Kenneth Hamidi (en)
Holding	There can be no tort of trespass to chattels for electronic communications that neither damages the recipient computer system nor impairs its functioning. (en)
Litigants	Intel v. Hamidi (en)
majority	Kathryn Werdegar
has abstract	Intel Corp. v. Hamidi, 30 Cal. 4th 1342 (2003), is a decision of the California Supreme Court, authored by Associate Justice Kathryn Werdegar. In Hamidi the California Supreme Court held that a former Intel Corporation employee's e-mails to current Intel employees, despite requests by Intel to stop sending messages, did not constitute trespass of Intel's e-mail system. Kourosh Kenneth Hamidi was a former Intel employee who sent e-mails criticizing Intel to current Intel employees. Because the messages caused discussion among employees, Intel asserted that these communications constitute trespass to chattels under California law. The trial court agreed and enjoined Hamidi from sending additional e-mails. Hamidi appealed his decision to the Court of Appeal, which affirmed the trial court's decision. The California Supreme Court, by a vote of 4-3, reversed. The decision was notable because the court declined to extend common law trespass claims to the computer context, absent actual damage. (en)
Concurrence	Joyce L. Kennard
prov:wasDerivedFrom	wikipedia-en:Intel_Corp._v._Hamidi?oldid=1111664435&ns=0
page length (characters) of wiki page	7887 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf	wikipedia-en:Intel_Corp._v._Hamidi
is Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage of	EBay v. Bidder's Edge CompuServe Inc. v. Cyber Promotions, Inc. School of Visual Arts v. Kuprewicz Trespass to chattels Contact scraping Dan L. Burk Register.com v. Verio Intel
is foaf:primaryTopic of	wikipedia-en:Intel_Corp._v._Hamidi

Faceted Search & Find service v1.17_git139 as of Feb 29 2024

Alternative Linked Data Documents: ODE Content Formats:

RDF

ODATA

Microdata

About

OpenLink Virtuoso version 08.03.3330 as of Mar 19 2024, on Linux (x86_64-generic-linux-glibc212), Single-Server Edition (378 GB total memory, 59 GB memory in use)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2024 OpenLink Software